Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Giving opinions to help broaden other's understandings is an interesting path.

Peace.G.

Folks
Just my opinion........

What is discussion but opinions here...... We are talking about a body art that has to be proven to show effectiveness....... The only feedback loop is between students and that is layered in itself........ There is no process in place in Aikido to really determine the effectiveness of the instructors and what they are teaching except coming down to personal opinion...personal discussions .........

What is discussion but opinions here...... We are talking about a body art that has to be proven to show effectiveness....... The only feedback loop is between students and that is layered in itself........ There is no process in place in Aikido to really determine the effectiveness of the instructors and what they are teaching except coming down to personal opinion...personal discussions .........

Again just my personal opinion.....nothing more or less.....

Gary

I fully agree Gary.

Everything that comes out of someones mouth is an opinion therefor it's quite strange to me to have to point it out when communicating.

Until people fully realize that then they will be caught up in arguments and misunderstandings.

The original reason why I provided responses in the Spirituality section that resulted in a post being split off to start this thread was to help foster this notion (feel free to substitute in "Training in the gendai budo descended from Daito-ryu" for "Aikido", as there are many of us in aikido's cousin arts who feel the same way):

Quote:

Graham Christian wrote:

Aikido is self development.

Before this thread goes into a death-spiral of rhetoric like so many pertaining to internal training before it, I'd like to say/restate that, as students of aiki, it makes sense to follow the fine examples set by Ueshiba and Tohei and explore methods outside of the confines of our respective budo silos to foster self-development within our martial training.

Many of today's aikido students embrace the notion that Japanese yoga, which completely lies outside of Aikido's martial arts ancestry and martial arts as a whole, led Tohei to key insights related to his esteemed skills and teaching methodology within aikido. Ueshiba sought inspiration and clarification of his purpose as an aikidoka via a Japanese religion and the Chinese philosophies applicable to internal martial arts. Ryuho Okuyama, who founded Hakkoryu, combined his Daito-ryu training with knowledge from Japanese and Chinese traditional medicine, and derived the conclusion that it is important for students "to relax both mind and body so that one$B!G(Bs Tanden or Hara (center of gravity) settles in the proper place" (as quoted from Hakkoryu's public website). Did this come from Daito-ryu, traditional Asian medicine, or both? Regardless, aikidoka who've sampled or cross-trained in Hakkoryu have pointed out that this statement sounds a lot like "weight underside", yet there's no public record of Okuyama having studied Japanese yoga. However, Ueshiba once said, "If your opponent strikes with fire, counter with water, becoming completely fluid and free-flowing." This could also be considered a tenet of Hakkoryu, and it's quite likely that Ueshiba and Okuyama came across the same sources of this knowledge. However, the statement is not just a general yin-yang tactical metaphor, but rather a reference to discreet aspects of internal training and application of internal power -- though the sources are likely from outside of Daito-ryu.

Quote:

Ron Ragusa wrote:

Ki exercises, Ki testing and technique are the seeds of Aikido, not the art itself. Once they're planted in the student diligent training and honest self examination are required for them to grow and bear fruit.

This pertains to "IP/IS training" methodologies (as they've been too conveniently carved out as separate from Ueshiba's or Tohei's IP/IS training methodologies) as well. To put it simply, one could say that Dan Harden's methodology, for example, provides specific models for extending ki once weight is underside, and in and yo from the one-point are established by the practitioner. The precedents set by Ueshiba and Tohei clearly spell out that exploration of relevant ideas and practices beyond what may be considered "aikido" at a given point in time are indeed part of what makes aikido unique, progressive and effective as a both a physical and spiritual endeavor. If the Chinese classics and Japanese yoga are part of this precedent, then it is quite reasonable, if not logical, that an IP/IS training methodology derived from Daito-ryu and vetted by men who've personally trained with Ueshiba and/or Tohei, is worth any aikidoka's time to investigate, if not pursue for the sake of self-development -- or at the very least, not to be dismissed simply because it is not part of one's silo of choice. After all, "ai" doesn't mean or connote avoidance or dismissiveness.

Koichi Tohei, Morihei Ueshiba, Kodo Horikawa, Yukiyoshi Sagawa, etc. all demonstrated what were essentially very similiar things. Where are the Tempukai guys demonstrating those things?

Tohei later claimed to have learned little from Ueshiba - but I wonder if that was true, or it was just part of the dance of hurt feelings that went back and forth among the involved parties.

It was my impression that the Tempukai provided the framework through which Tohei understood (as much as he did) Ueshiba's "stuff", not that it provided the "stuff" itself, but opinions will certainly vary.

Best,

Chris

There is an excellent section on this in an interview Stanley Pranin did available here: http://members.aikidojournal.com/pub...oichi-tohei-2/ Tohei Sensei specifically states that his four principles came from Ueshiba NOT the Tempukai, he says they were what he observed O Sensei doing, though the words as he formulated them may have more to do with how the Tempukai explained these things. Tohei Sensei further states:
"The only thing I learned from Tempu Nakamura, for example, was that gthe mind leads the body.h On all other matters he used to ask me questions! He was very modest and humble in that respect. When I said that I did not know the answer, he would then say, gWell, let us study it together then.h"

Somewhere else I can't find right now Tohei Sensei discusses the focusing on keeping one point and how in the Tempukai they did it by tensing the muscles of the abdomen which was exhausting, but that Nakamura and he did it simply by concentrating on it, but that after Nakamura died everyone in the Tempukai went back to tensing their muscles. In the interview I linked to above you can see that Tohei is clearly crediting Ueshiba as the source of his methods (via careful observation of what Ueshiba did), though the language Tohei used to teach was far different than the religious language of the founder, and probably came from Tohei Sensei's time at the Tempukai, the Ichikukai and his experiences teaching foreigners in Hawaii.

As an aside, I rarely bother with aikiweb anymore, but glad to see that people are finally acknowledging Tohei Sensei's methods as being IS/IP (or at least compatible with it), I used to clash with Mike Sigman and Dan Harden about it when I last posted regularly. They now seem to be agreeing with what I was saying all along, no doubt they'll choose to remember it differently

Mike

"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."
-Martin Luther King Jr

As an aside, I rarely bother with aikiweb anymore, but glad to see that people are finally acknowledging Tohei Sensei's methods as being IS/IP (or at least compatible with it), I used to clash with Mike Sigman and Dan Harden about it when I last posted regularly. They now seem to be agreeing with what I was saying all along, no doubt they'll choose to remember it differently

Mike

I would say that it's not a yes or no question, that there are a number of degrees and qualifiers. My hunch is that Dan and Mike would express opinions along similar lines, but they're not here and I certainly can't speak for them.

I will say that both Mike and Dan have spoken to me positively about Tohei (or at least, parts of what Tohei was doing) for quite a long time.

I would say that it's not a yes or no question, that there are a number of degrees and qualifiers. My hunch is that Dan and Mike would express opinions along similar lines, but they're not here and I certainly can't speak for them.

I will say that both Mike and Dan have spoken to me positively about Tohei (or at least, parts of what Tohei was doing) for quite a long time.

Best,

Chris

I fully agree it's not as black and white as that, I just remember gettign into arguments with them because the assumption was always that I didn't know what IS/IP was and the general position that it was something lacking from aikido. Stack that against my perception that it most certainly isn't missing from the aikido I've always practiced and you have a recipe for argument, so I gave up on aikiweb as I felt it was in general making me something of an arsehole. I drop in from time to time though.

Anyway, they were right on one thing re Ki Aikido. My early experiences were always being told, 'keep one point' then being tested and told I wasn't doing it right. At no stage can I ever remember being taught how to keep one point, it was just something I picked up from experiencing someone else doing it. I've met several people who've trained with either Mike or Dan who seem to say they do a good job of answering the how? problem, I've of course come up with my own way of doing this for my own students now, so we're probably doing the same sort of thing... more or less, YMMV. They will of course be coming at it from other perspectives than mine.

Mike

"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."
-Martin Luther King Jr

I fully agree it's not as black and white as that, I just remember gettign into arguments with them because the assumption was always that I didn't know what IS/IP was and the general position that it was something lacking from aikido.

IMO, it's a big leap from saying that Koichi Tohei has some good skills to saying that I therefore understand what Mike or Dan is saying about IS/IP. The "we already do that" reaction is very common and, IME, almost always mistaken.

And yes, I think that it's generally lacking in modern Aikido. Anyway, no point in revisiting that argument, Dan holds workshops all year for those who are interested in seeing for themselves.

I haven't been privy to the discussions you've had with Dan, Mike, et al (and am too busy at the moment to go archive-diving). But here's what is clear:

Here in Hawaii, what Tohei taught is well understood, and many people here still have first-hand accounts of his methodology and skills.

Dan has repeatedly said that Tohei's model is compatible with the greater body of aiki tanren that Aikido inherited from Daito-ryu (and that mirrors similar training in, for example, Chinese internal arts, and some extant yoga).

Many people in Hawaii who are familiar with Tohei's method and who have also trained with Dan agree with Dan's above characterization, as do others with exposure to both methods.

So, a subset of a set does not equal the set; but yes, the subset can be profound in its own right, and apparently was/is in Tohei's case. Dan recently reiterated at a workshop in Hawaii, "Do not take Tohei lightly. The man was powerful."

IMO, it's a big leap from saying that Koichi Tohei has some good skills to saying that I therefore understand what Mike or Dan is saying about IS/IP. The "we already do that" reaction is very common and, IME, almost always mistaken.

I appreciate that that's the case, I don't believe I'm one of those people. The reason I don't believe I'm one of those people is because I've met a number of people who've trained with either Dan or Mike or both, and nothing they've shown me is incompatible or stunningly different from the way I do things. Though as with all things of this nature, I am of course still learning. I'm sure it'd be interesting to go to one of their workshops if I get the opportunity.

"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."
-Martin Luther King Jr

So, a subset of a set does not equal the set; but yes, the subset can be profound in its own right, and apparently was/is in Tohei's case. Dan recently reiterated at a workshop in Hawaii, "Do not take Tohei lightly. The man was powerful."

The idea that Tohei's approach was a subset of the set strikes me as a rather self-serving position and one that would, to my mind, only be said by someone whose vested interest is in portraying it as less than what they do. I prefer to think of them as both having something to offer. In Tohei Sensei's own words "The mountain does not laugh at the river because it is lowly, the river does not laugh at the mountain because it cannot move about". The sentiment he expresses in that quote is one he directly attributed to the founder as being a part of the nature of aikido that it doesn't seek to criticise other arts. I do not believe anything Mike or Dan has to offer is something other than worthwhile and a good addition to most people's training. Nor am I deluded as to think I do everything they do, I do not. But having met and practised with a number of people who have practised with one or both of them, I'm very sure that what I do is broadly similar and totally compatible. Probably missing a few things but I'm in it for the journey more than the destination, so that's fine by me.

It seems I've returned to the same old aikiweb, and I thought for a minute there I'd missed it.

"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."
-Martin Luther King Jr

The idea that Tohei's approach was a subset of the set strikes me as a rather self-serving position and one that would, to my mind, only be said by someone whose vested interest is in portraying it as less than what they do. I prefer to think of them as both having something to offer. In Tohei Sensei's own words "The mountain does not laugh at the river because it is lowly, the river does not laugh at the mountain because it cannot move about". The sentiment he expresses in that quote is one he directly attributed to the founder as being a part of the nature of aikido that it doesn't seek to criticise other arts. I do not believe anything Mike or Dan has to offer is something other than worthwhile and a good addition to most people's training. Nor am I deluded as to think I do everything they do, I do not. But having met and practised with a number of people who have practised with one or both of them, I'm very sure that what I do is broadly similar and totally compatible. Probably missing a few things but I'm in it for the journey more than the destination, so that's fine by me.

It seems I've returned to the same old aikiweb, and I thought for a minute there I'd missed it.

Not criticising doesn't mean not analyzing.

It also doesn't mean that all approaches are equally valid - or why would both Morihei Ueshiba and Koichi Tohei been so critical of other people's approaches in public and in private?

You'll have to ask Mert, but my thinking is that he used the word "subset" in the literal sense - the theories of martial movement we're talking about are very old and very specific, laid out in a complete and extensive manner. Many people, or arts, choose to focus on a portion of the full theory. Sometimes that's out of ignorance of the larger picture, and sometimes it's out of choice for specific purposes. That doesn't mean that what they're doing is good or bad, they just are what they are.

If you think that they have something worthwhile - then go see them. I did, as well as Tohei, Maruyama and the others. It will give you a better background to discuss them by.

The idea that Tohei's approach was a subset of the set strikes me as a rather self-serving position and one that would, to my mind, only be said by someone whose vested interest is in portraying it as less than what they do. I prefer to think of them as both having something to offer.

Mike,

As I stated, the subset characterization is accepted by people in the place where Tohei focused significant effort to disseminate aikido outside of the U.S., and these people have first-hand experience with Tohei's method and Dan's method. Therefore, saying that this characterization would "only be said by someone whose vested interest is in portraying it as less than what they do" makes no sense: people here have been ardently trying to preserve what the founder and Tohei imparted first hand half a century ago. And, until three years ago, in Hawaii, frankly, only Chris Li was interested in what Dan and Mike had to offer.

Quote:

Mike Haft wrote:

I do not believe anything Mike or Dan has to offer is something other than worthwhile and a good addition to most people's training. Nor am I deluded as to think I do everything they do, I do not. But having met and practised with a number of people who have practised with one or both of them, I'm very sure that what I do is broadly similar and totally compatible. Probably missing a few things but I'm in it for the journey more than the destination, so that's fine by me.

Everyone's practice is different. Good for you that you've tried to make rhyme and reason out of the general principles Tohei imparted. How has this work tied to what you've experienced from people who've trained with Dan and Mike, specific to spiraling / silk-reeling? This is the specific portion of the set that Tohei's subset does not address, unless it's some kind of okuden.

And, no worries if spiraling falls into the category of "being a good addition", and being one of those "missing" things. One of Dan's key admonitions is that practitioners focus on spiraling and other more complex movements -- over foundational connection and opening skills like one-point, keeping weight underside, and refining the ability to extend ki -- at their own peril.

Good for you that you've tried to make rhyme and reason out of the general principles Tohei imparted.

<passive-agressive-sarcasm>Firstly, thank you for taking the time to patronise me on the internet. I enjoy being spoken to by strangers in the manner that I congratulate my 3 year old son when he successfully uses the toilet. Makes me glad to be here on aikiweb.</passive-agressive-sarcasm>

I'll just add a smiley so that humour is indicated, thereby attempting to gloss over my unpleasant statement, it's one of the things that always works well on internet forums

Quote:

Mert Gambito wrote:

How has this work tied to what you've experienced from people who've trained with Dan and Mike, specific to spiraling / silk-reeling? This is the specific portion of the set that Tohei's subset does not address, unless it's some kind of okuden.

And, no worries if spiraling falls into the category of "being a good addition", and being one of those "missing" things. One of Dan's key admonitions is that practitioners focus on spiraling and other more complex movements -- over foundational connection and opening skills like one-point, keeping weight underside, and refining the ability to extend ki -- at their own peril.

I studied chen style tai chi for a number of years just before I began aikido and stopped shortly after I found aikido. I went back to it for a little bit not long after I got my shodan and found it complimented my training nicely, but I moved away and never took it up again as there was no teacher where I moved to. Though a teacher has moved near to where I live now so I've been thinking about starting again. All in all I'd say I got about 2+ years of fairly regular training in it alongside aikido, not much but enough to be useful to me in conjunction with my aikido.

One of the interesting things about spiraling and silk reeling as I understand them (and keep in mind I've not practised them with a teacher for some years here so could well be wrong) is that of course you're quite right they aren't really in any of Tohei Sensei's standard ki tests, nor can I remember them ever being actively taught to me. But if you look at some of Tohei Sensei's waza, particularly things like kirikaeshi which you see done a lot in taigis it's right there to some degree. I'm basing this on the fact that learning about some of those things helped me figure out how to do the aikido properly. So it could be that I'm cutting and pasting them into aikido unintentionally and they were never there, I just added them of my own accord, if that were the case then I'd say we're probably in complete agreement about all this, though I think there's probably still room for debate. If the only way for me to do those waza correctly was to bring my tai chi experience to them was it because the tai chi was the missing piece? Or was it because it was there all along and I'd simply not figured it out or been actively taught it yet? I don't know, all I know is that my teacher at the time commented that I was getting better at it and that he could do it just fine despite never to the best of my knowledge having studied tai chi of any flavour.

In the sayu exercises of Tohei you can see at the 8.17min mark here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuuhW9t11e0 I found silk reeling to be very helpful as I recall, though we're going back a decade or so and my recollection is a little fuzzy. Note that what you see on the video isn't the exact exercise I'm thinking of so it may strike you as me talking nonsense, it is however, the only video of Tohei Sensei I could find where he's doing anything like the exercise I'm thinking of, nonetheless I hope it should be reasonably apparent that silk reeling could be quite helpful in this aikido waza in certain contexts/variations. Sayu as shown in the video is one of the most misapplied technicques I've come across in the aikido canon. I've seen people ranked as high as 6th dan doing it by basically getting uke close to them and then just smashing them across the face with their forearm/elbow. That's just ugly. I've also heard them describe it as being the Daito Ryu way of doing it and that they obviously come from a more 'traditional' style of aikido than me, never mind the fact that what they're doing is most certainly *not* the Daito Ryu way of doing it according to my limited exposure to the art (outside of aikido). Suffice to say my understanding of the technique is that when done correctly there need be no smashing or crunching, uke simply cannot remain standing because nage's outstretched arm is in the way, this arm should not yield if pushed or pulled, uke's only escape is to either move backwards, which often happens if this is done statically, or if done dynamically their forward momentum means they must drop their head and upper body out of the way as they travel through.

Regarding spiralling, and again you'll have to forgive my rustiness if I get this wrong, it may interest you to know that within the style of aikido I now practise the founder - Koretoshi Maruyama - has introduced some exercises that bear a striking resemblance to spiralling. He observed that after a few decades many people in the Ki Society were getting bad backs, he attributes this to them holding themselves in a certain posture whilst always keeping one point. Consequently he now emphasises focusing on the sacrum which he says amounts to the same thing as keeping one point. He also has exercises where you imagine a ball in the bowl of your pelvis which you roll around, he encourages this in warm ups so that stiff backs do not result after long years of training. It's worth noting that he doesn't link this specific exercise to hand movements the way it might be in tai chi (well if he has I've never seen it done), but it's intriguing nonetheless. Rolling imaginary balls around in your hara is not the only time I've heard him speak about imaginary spheres (I can't bring myself to use the phrase 'big ball of ki' for some reason), I've heard it in other contexts, I'm reasonably sure it's a Daito Ryu influence coming out in his teaching, I don't think he spontaneously created it himself. How these things came to be in his technical repertoire is another issue entirely.

Mike

PS - sorry about the sarcasm earlier in the post, perhaps you see now why I left aikiweb for many years...

"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."
-Martin Luther King Jr

Thanks for the clarifications, Mike. One thing that I think is clearer now is that you and Koretoshi Maruyama are not sticking with just what the greater portion of the bell curve of Ki Society folks and other Tohei adherants are doing.

Chen-style, taiji. Daito-ryu. Again, my praise for seeking the best of what's in the box / subset by looking at what else is in the set. Yeah, I agree there may be more agreement than not, with room for nuanced debate. We'll all have this reconciled far better in the next decade. Hope you'll check back in again beforehand.

Thanks for the clarifications, Mike. One thing that I think is clearer now is that you and Koretoshi Maruyama are not sticking with just what the greater portion of the bell curve of Ki Society folks and other Tohei adherants are doing.

Chen-style, taiji. Daito-ryu. Again, my praise for seeking the best of what's in the box / subset by looking at what else is in the set. Yeah, I agree there may be more agreement than not, with room for nuanced debate. We'll all have this reconciled far better in the next decade. Hope you'll check back in again beforehand.

Kiatsu. As a Hakkoryu student, I find this very interesting. How widely is this studied and practiced among Ki Aikido folks (I don't recall anyone in Hawaii with whom I've trained mentioning it)? The brief demos on YouTube I've watched didn't reference traditional Asian medicine meridians and points, so I'm curious about the underlying theory.

Okajima's been doing some funky things that were perplexing 6 yrs ago (when i first saw) and slightly less so now (see everything is Soutai). With a recent entree to hands on with some IS guys in Sydney, I see his solo exercises (which were and oddity at the time , but did them for some months and found all kinds of stuff contained in them) are almost the same, the tanden ball (and the aiki age, aikisage) stuff is functional work in the abdomen. Its been really neat to see what Maruyama and Okajima are doing through IS coloured glasses, its both an external validation (not that thats needed but nice to see), a diagnostic tool and a fresh viewpoint as well as something to do in its own right.

Okajima's been doing some funky things that were perplexing 6 yrs ago (when i first saw) and slightly less so now (see everything is Soutai). With a recent entree to hands on with some IS guys in Sydney, I see his solo exercises (which were and oddity at the time , but did them for some months and found all kinds of stuff contained in them) are almost the same, the tanden ball (and the aiki age, aikisage) stuff is functional work in the abdomen. Its been really neat to see what Maruyama and Okajima are doing through IS coloured glasses, its both an external validation (not that thats needed but nice to see), a diagnostic tool and a fresh viewpoint as well as something to do in its own right.

best,
dan

I need to get my backside to oz and practise with you at some point Dan. Someone here in the UK (Chris) is talking about visiting in the autumn, if I can go with him I will. Maybe see you then.

"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."
-Martin Luther King Jr

I first started in Ki Aikido after reading "Ki in Everyday Life" in the mid 80's when in Italy. Didn't practice there for more than 9 months or so, but with a very nice group in Turin (can't remember names any more). Most of my training since then has been Aikikai related - in the Yamaguchi lineage.

I find that "keep weight underside" works well particularly when teaching sword work and how to cut/drop a sword. Also related to the Sayu exercise noted above, and variations such as lifting the arm up while still keeping the shoulder down - same for lifting a sword.